DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
The amendments filed on December 3, 2025 have been entered. Claims 1-20 remain pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on December 3, 2025 in response to the Non-Final Office Action dated September 3, 2025 have been fully considered.
Applicant argues, in page 9 of the Remarks, “Claim 1 is directed to path tracing using path tracing probe packets to determine a packet path. Wang is a method for collecting bit error information using measurement packets, not for path tracing and not for building a full path trace with per-hop timestamps. See Wang, Abstract.”.
In response, path tracing can be interpreted broadly since neither the claim recites specifics of path tracing nor the specification defines it in an exclusive way to preclude it to be interpreted as collecting bit error information. In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of applicant’s invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., building a full path trace with per-hop timestamps ) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Applicant argues, in page 9 of the Remarks, “Furthermore, claim 1 recites "receiving a path tracing probe packet with a first IPv6 Destination Options Header with Path Tracing Option (DOH-PT) header that encodes path tracing information of the path tracing source node." However, Wang only discloses adding bit error information to a generic IPv6 extension header based on "indication information" in that header. See Wang, paragraphs [0080] and [0081]. There is no disclosure in Wang related to a DOH-PT that encodes tracing information of the path tracing source node, as recited in claim 1.”
In response, Paragraph 0081 of Wang discloses the packet includes destination option header as stated “In still another example, if the packet 1 is an SRv6 packet, the IPv6 extension header may be a destination option header (DOH)”. The indication information is generated by the head node and included in the IPv6 extension header as shown in the Fig. 2, step S101.
Examiner’s Note about the Format of 35 U.S.C. 102/103 Rejections
Generally, limitations of a claim are reproduced identically and followed by examiner’s explanation with citation from prior art in Italic enclosed by a parenthesis, (), for each limitation. In examiner’s explanation, the mapping of the key elements of a limitation to the disclosed elements of prior art is shown by stating the disclosed element immediately followed by the claimed element inside a parenthesis. Specific quotation from prior art is delineated with quotation mark, ““. If primary art fails to teach a limitation or part of the limitation, the limitation or the part of the limitation is placed inside double square brackets, [[]], for better understandability, and appropriate secondary art(s) is/are applied later addressing the deficiency of the primary art.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (US PGPUB No. US 20230344752 A1), hereinafter, Wang, in view of Nagarajan et al. (US PGPUB No. US 20080159287 A1), hereinafter, Nagarajan.
Regarding claim 1:
Wang teaches:
A method for path tracing, the method comprising:
establishing a path tracing session corresponding to transmission of a plurality of path tracing probe packets from a path tracing source node, wherein the path tracing source node is included in an IPv6 network fabric (paragraph 0070 discloses a path in IPv6 network as stated “As shown in FIG. 1, a node A, a node B, a node C, a node D, and a node E are all nodes in an IPv6 network. In an example, a transmission path 1 is node A-node B-node C-node D-node E. In other words, the node A is a head node on the transmission path 1, the node E is a tail node on the transmission path 1, and the node B, the node C, and the node D are all intermediate nodes of the transmission path 1”. Paragraph 0080 discloses transmission of packet by head node);
receiving a path tracing probe packet with a first IPv6 Destination Options Header with Path Tracing Option (DOH-PT) header that encodes path tracing information of the path tracing source node, wherein the path tracing probe packet is further indicative of respective path tracing information for each path tracing midpoint node of a plurality of path tracing midpoint nodes along a path from the path tracing source node to a path tracing sink node included in the IPv6 network fabric (Fig. 2, step S106, shows receiving the packet. Paragraph 0081 discloses the packet include destination option header as stated “In still another example, if the packet 1 is an SRv6 packet, the IPv6 extension header may be a destination option header (DOH)”. Paragraph 0084 discloses the DOH include indication information of intermediate node on the transmission path);
updating the path tracing probe packet to include a second DOH-PT header that encodes path tracing information of the path tracing sink node, wherein an updated path tracing probe packet includes the first DOH-PT header and the second DOH-PT header (paragraph 0117 discloses updating packet 1 with bit error information of the tail node to generate packet 2. Paragraph 0125 discloses the tail node adds a DOH extortion header ).
Wang does not teach encapsulating the updated path tracing probe packet with an additional IPv6 header corresponding to forwarding information of a collector node.
Nagarajan teaches encapsulating the updated path tracing probe packet with an additional IPv6 header corresponding to forwarding information of a collector node (paragraph 0035 discloses sending the packet to centralized storage server as stated “Once the destination node has the desired performance data, it can do several things dependent upon the network structure. Several possibilities include the destination node transmitting the data back to the source node, the destination node transmitting the data to a centralized storage server where any node on the network can access the information, or the destination node broadcasting the information to all the nodes in the network.”. Paragraph 0017 discloses the network IPv6 network. Therefore, transmission of data include encapsulation the data in as IPvv6 packet).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang to incorporate the teaching Nagarajan about sending the trace data to a centralized server. One would be motivated to do to any node, for example network administrator, to access the performance data for better network monitoring (see paragraphs 0009 and 0035 of Nagarajan).
As to claim 2, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Wang in view of Nagarajan teach all the limitation of claim 1 as shown above.
Wang further teaches wherein the path tracing probe packet with the first DOH-PT header is received by the path tracing sink node and from the path tracing source node (Fig. 2, step S106, shows the communication apparatus 3, the tail node, receive packet 1 from the communication apparatus 1, the head node).
As to claim 3, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Wang in view of Nagarajan all the limitation of claim 1 as shown above.
Wang does not teach wherein the collector node is a path tracing Regional Collector node associated with one or more of the path tracing sink node or the path tracing source node.
Nagarajan wherein the collector node is a path tracing Regional Collector node associated with one or more of the path tracing sink node or the path tracing source node (paragraph 0035 discloses sending the packet to centralized storage server is associated with destination node).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang to incorporate the teaching Nagarajan about sending the trace data to a centralized server. One would be motivated to do that to enable any node, for example network administrator, to access the performance data for better network monitoring (see paragraphs 0009 and 0035 of Nagarajan).
As to claim 4, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Wang in view of Nagarajan all the limitation of claim 1 as shown above.
Wang further teaches wherein the path tracing probe packet with the first DOH-PT header further includes a Hop-by-Hop Path Tracing header indicative of the respective path tracing information for each path tracing midpoint node of the plurality of path tracing midpoint nodes along the path from the path tracing source node to the path tracing sink node (see at least paragprhe 0081 disclosing DOH header and hop-by-hop option with the indication information of the error of the intermediate node).
As to claim 5, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Wang in view of Nagarajan all the limitation of claim 1 as shown above.
Wang further teaches wherein updating the path tracing probe packet with the first DOH-PT header comprises: appending, by the path tracing sink node, the second DOH-PT header to the path tracing probe packet with the first DOH-PT header (paragraphs 0124 and 0125 disclose the packet 2 include another DOH header with tracing information) .
As to claim 6, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Wang in view of Nagarajan all the limitation of claim 1 as shown above.
Wang does not teach wherein encapsulating the updated path tracing probe packet with the additional IPv6 header is performed by the path tracing sink node.
Nagarajan wherein encapsulating the updated path tracing probe packet with the additional IPv6 header is performed by the path tracing sink node (paragraph 0017 discloses the network IPv6 network. Therefore, transmission of data includes encapsulation the data in as IPvv6 packet).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang to incorporate the teaching Nagarajan about encapsulation the data in as IPvv6 packet. One would be motivated to do that to improve monitoring o and maintenance of IPv6 network (see paragraph 0017 of Nagarajan).
As to claim 7, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Wang in view of Nagarajan all the limitation of claim 1 as shown above.
Wang further teaches further comprising: transmitting, by the path tracing source node, the path tracing probe packet with the first DOH-PT header that encodes path tracing information of the path tracing source node (Fig. 2, step S101 and S102, show transmission of packet 1 with DOH header to encode the error information).
As to claim 8, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Wang in view of Nagarajan all the limitation of claim 1 as shown above.
Wang further teaches wherein the path tracing sink node generates the updated path tracing probe packet based on appending the second DOH-PT header to the first DOH-PT header of the path tracing probe packet, and wherein the second DOH-PT header is separate from the first DOH-PT header (paragraphs 0124 and 0125 disclose the packet 2 include another DOH header with tracing information) .
As to claim 9, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Wang in view of Nagarajan all the limitation of claim 1 as shown above.
Wang further teaches wherein the path tracing sink node generates the updated path tracing probe packet to include the second DOH-PT header within the first DOH-PT header (paragprhe 0124 and 0125 discloses the packet 2 include another DOH header with tracing information).
As to claim 10, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated Wang in view of Nagarajan all the limitation of claim 1 as shown above.
Wang further teaches wherein the path tracing sink node and the path tracing source node are included in a same IPv6 network fabric (paragraph 0070 discloses all the nodes are in the same IPv6 network).
As to claim 11, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated. Wang in view of Nagarajan all the limitation of claim 1 as shown above.
Wang further teaches wherein the IPv6 network fabric is not a Segment Routing over IPv6 network fabric (paragraph 0070 discloses the network is IPv6 network).
As to claim 12, the rejection of claim 11 is incorporated. Wang in view of Nagarajan all the limitation of claim 11 as shown above.
Wang further teaches wherein the path tracing probe packet does not include a Segment Routing Header path tracing Type-Length-Value field (see paragraphs 0081 and 0082 disclose the header is DOH not SRH ).
Regarding claim 13:
Claim 13 is directed towards a system comprising: one or more processors; and one or more computer-readable storage media having computer-readable instructions stored thereon, wherein the computer-readable instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform the method of claim 1 (paragraphs 0196 -0198 of Wang disclose communication apparatus with processor, memory, and instruction). Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 14 is directed towards system performing the method of claim 2. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 15 is directed towards system performing the method of claim 4. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 16 is directed towards system performing the method of claim 5. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 17 is directed towards system performing the method of claim 8. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 18 is directed towards system performing the method of claim 6. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 19 is directed towards system performing the method of claim 11. Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 20:
Claim 20 is directed towards one or more non-transitory computer-readable media comprising computer-readable instructions, which when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform the method of claim 1 (paragraphs 0196 -0198 of Wang disclose communication apparatus with processor, memory, and instruction). Accordingly, it is rejected under similar rationale.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAMAL M HOSSAIN whose telephone number is (571)270-3070. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30-5:30 M-F.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, John Follansbee can be reached at (571)272-3964. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
December 16, 2025
/KAMAL M HOSSAIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2444